Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: glenn Date: Jul 30, 2004 5:23am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Over 3 days to download just 1 show!!!

However you may choose to listen to these shows is fine... it's not the listenability of a given show, it's the generational loss from mp3>cd>cd>cd that's causing the shudders...

if you EAC the cdr though, [no offense meant here] that's exactly ignorant, since the .shn files could have been directly decompressed to the original wavs, then you could encode the original wavs to mp3 or ogg vorbis or whatever...

and while I'm in this neighborhood, have you calibrated, tested EAC? when you get .shn files, decompress and pass checksum, you have the 'master file'

... now try these experiments to prove to yourself whatever these experiments prove to you:

[you will need a shn file, the decompressed wav file, the shn.md5 and you will need a wav.md5 generated from the shn-extracted wav file]

take your 'master' wavs and burn an audio disc >
extract that disc to wav >
use the checksum generated from the master wav file to check the new extracted wavs... if they pass, your EAC is set up to do exact copies... if not, then you do not have EAC set right and are NOT extracting without corruption. [EAC IS capable of exact copies, but it MUST be set up correctly first]

from your 'master wavs' (the ones that were decompressed from the shn file and passed the md5 checksum test) >
create mp3s >
burn them as audio to an audio disc >
extract this second disc to wavs >
do a checksum verification on the new mp3 sourced wav files using the original wav.md5... do they pass?
[they dont pass, (they can't possibly pass as the file is changed)]

now generate a second checksum for these new wavs>
burn another audio disc from these 'second-disk wavs'>
extract this third disc using EAC>
generate a third md5 from the newly extracted files>
test the new files to see if they pass verification using the first or second md5
open each md5 file in notepad>
note that the checksums are entirely different in all 3 files.

This should prove beyond doubt that each generation of digital copies (fromma lossy source such as mp3) has different digits... within an appallingly short time, generationally speaking, this process will result in horrible firghteningly bad noises...

but the 'non-elitist' guy with the original shn files could be burning perfect copies easier than burning mp3 copies... his music is fine, but he's sharing the flawed copies, he doesn't care about those that come after him in line, they can have the pops and whooshes and garngggkkkgg noise on them.

the 'elitists' as you call them. are actually trying to preserve the files from loss, so that you, one hundred generations down the road can have the SAME PERFECT FILE THAT THEY HAVE, in fact that seems to me to be the very opposite of elitist.

do what you want to the music, just don't do your favorite artists the disservice of circulating the bad copies.. because now you have proven to yourself that though they don't sound differently to you, discs with a lossy compression generation will produce digit errors when copied.

I have thousands of mp3s myself purely for listening to while working on the computer,but if I give you a copy, it will be the original master recording, not from one of the mp3s.

I have stacks and stacks of shns, just so that I can 'non-elitistly' share the same quality music that was given to me...
sharing seems to me to be the thing that runs this machine, and I prefer to share files that are impervious to generational loss.

I hope this was of some help to someone somewhere.

This post was modified by glenn on 2004-07-30 12:23:44

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: intexity Date: Jan 22, 2007 8:13pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Over 3 days to download just 1 show!!!

i am glad to have found this post as i was researching the exact issue at hand. i like to make the shows i download readily available for all and keeping them in original condition definitely being one of my major concerns with this project of mine. yes i was a heathen out of ignorance for about 15 disks worth but realized that i probably needed to know more about burning to cd-r and passing them on considering the amount of work it took just to listen to the file types. so as i set up EAC and was researching how to make it burn straight to cd-r from shorten i came across this post. my only question is can you help me make sure i set up eac right or else tell me if there is any way you can help me understand more about how to work with these file types (shn,flac,etc..) i want to do my part as i was too late to see the shows but want to do my part to keep the history alive.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: glenn Date: Jan 23, 2007 2:01pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Over 3 days to download just 1 show!!!

Best way to make audio cds from shn or flac files,
I think,
is to decompress (.shn or .flac) to .wav format,

using appropriate tools

(see this thread:
for easy to understand info on tools...)

(the .wav files will be bit-perfect identical to the original source .wav used to make the .shn/or/.flac)

and use the .wav files as your source file to burn your audio discs, using any burning program that burns audio, like Nero, or Easy CD creator or whatever you are already comfortable with.

EAC is only necessary if you are trying to make copies using an audio cd as your source, which you only should do if there is not a lower-generation copy (like your 'perfect original .wav files you got when you decompressed your .shn or .flac files)

because (encoding onto an audio cd and then) copying from that cd introduces 'generational loss' of data...

... but you get no generational loss if you use .wav files which are bit-perfict replicas of the originals (which is what you get with LOSSLESS compression formats like .shn or .flac)(as opposed to LOSSY formats like .mp3 or .mp-anything-else or .ogg or the like)

Hope this helps. I get an email if you post in this thread, so if you have more questions... AND I can answer them, I will.

Have fun.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: intexity Date: Jan 23, 2007 2:23pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Over 3 days to download just 1 show!!!

ok so if i got this right the way i have been doing it which is using mkw to convert to wav and using nero to burn is ok but if someone tries to go backwards and use one of my cd's to create a compression file whatever format they want will it remain as good as the original shn that i dled?
thanks for your response it sounds like i was overthinking everything i was reading.

Reply to this post

Poster: 5string Date: Jul 30, 2004 3:55pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Over 3 days to download just 1 show!!!

My EAC is set up according to Chris Myden. All hail the Uber Fuhrer!! It rips 100% exact copies if the source CD is not damaged. It will tell you the % of accuracy that it was able to read the disc.
As far as making copies, I don't anticipate it happening and if someone wants a copy I'll tell them archive dot org. That's what the archive is for. I've got maybe 50 cassettes of Dead and other groups shows, some really rare stuff, mostly collected in the early eighties and have yet to make copy 1 for anybody. So, basically I think most people are the end user of what they download from here. Yes, I shudder at the thought of digital dummies changing the format back and forth wav>mp3>wav>mp3>wav>mp3 a hundred times over. That why the digital audio education of the uninitiated is so important. And if I was to make copies I would make an exact copy of a (data) vbr.mp3 CD-R which would lose no quality since I don't burn in .cda format. The 100th copy would be identical to the 1st.
As far those sonic elitists who think .shns are are an exact copy of the master, I bring up the old analog versus digital argument and remind everyone that people don't hear in 1s and 0s and the actual analog performance is completely lost in a digital copy. So whether you listen in .mp3, .shn, .wav, .flac, or .ogg it ain't analog, it ain't real and it's only 1s and 0s tricking your brain. As long as my brain thinks it's real, that's what counts!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: glenn Date: Aug 1, 2004 8:08pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Over 3 days to download just 1 show!!!

Thanks you two, that made it worth the effort of writing that out.

yes, it's true that 'you lose some music' in any digital format, compared to the original vibrations of the air -the sound itself.

all of my references to shn being identical to the original master refer to the original source .wav files themselves... in which case,shn does in fact make bit-perfect replicas of the original wav.

I like the free shows out of the blue idea..but 'mailbomb' is a scary word. Cheers for turning people on to free music!

I agree that it's great to send someone to for music, but I find it really fun to keep some discs of various bands with me, all of which I label: "www," in addition to labeling the show.

I love to turn someone on to resources like this one.

edit:afterthought: and it occurs to me that none of this is real, it's all empty space filled with the music of the spheres: dancing electrons etc, and all that's really there is information ... this is all a dream we dreamed one afternoon long ago, and in the beginning was the word, and all of us are bundles of information ourselves

This post was modified by glenn on 2004-08-02 03:08:30

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ChinaDog Date: Jul 30, 2004 5:48am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Over 3 days to download just 1 show!!!


man that was so good Im gonna reburn everything I have and my files are all wav from shn already!
I make mp3s@320 for my HD that I NEVER intended to pass on but I feel so guilty for burning shows and dumping the shns Im gonna re download them all to save "just in case" and burn everything on better media because your right .. it deserves it

In fact im going to "mailbomb" some people on the deadhook forums with perfect copys from those shns!
(that means mail someone s show not on on their list without them asking for it... for those who might not be familiar with the term)

that was a good post THANK YOU